[Gimp-user] Font loading problem
Dear all, I have just installed GIMP latest version on windows xp version 2002. When I try to start GIMP I get the error message during loading fonts: GLib-ERROR **: gemem.c:140 failed to allocate 2147483649 bytes aborting I checked FAQ but could not find the answer. Unfortunately I could not get any reply any windows user group. I would be grateful for any suggestions. Regards ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] Plugin Install Challenge (Debian Linux kernel 2.6.6, KDE 3.2)
Greetings, I am attempting to use gimptool-2.0 to install a plugin called Multitile (from the Gimp Plugin Registry) and I'm running into trouble. I've got a feeling that I need to change the gimptool-2.0 command to add, or change, prefix or exec-prefix to gcc instead of i386-linux-gcc. Is this correct? Exactly how do I do this? Below is the error when install was attempted. Thanks for any help, Gail gimptool-2.0 --install Multitile.c /usr/bin/install -c -d /root/.gimp-2.0/plug-ins i386-linux-gcc -Wall -g -O2 -I/usr/include/gimp-2.0 -DXTHREADS -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -o /root/.gimp-2.0/plug-ins/Multitile Multitile.c -L/usr/lib -lgimpui-2.0 -lgimpwidgets-2.0 -lgimp-2.0 -lgimpcolor-2.0 -lgimpmath-2.0 -lgimpbase-2.0 -Wl,--export-dynamic -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -latk-1.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lm -lpangoxft-1.0 -lpangox-1.0 -lpango-1.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -ldl -lglib-2.0 /usr/bin/gimptool-2.0: line 325: exec: i386-linux-gcc: not found ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] ANNOUNCE: GIMP 2.0 User Manual -- developer snapshot
Hi all, a new snapshot of the newly written GIMP 2.0 User Manual is available from: ftp://ftp.gimp.org/pub/gimp/help/testing/gimp-help-2-0.4.tar.gz and includes major improvements for the four current available languages, which are: English, French, Swedish and German. This developer snapshot is basically for soliciting new contributors, who will assist us in writing and correcting errors. Check out the project page on the GIMP Wiki at: http://wiki.gimp.org/gimp/GimpDocs The Manual itself is written in XML and Docbook. For new doc-writers, knowledge of XML and Docbook is helpful, but not required. We're also looking for proof readers. A mostly up-to-date CVS version of the manual can be found at: http://docs.gimp.org/ Thanks to all who made this snapshot possible. Happy writing and testing, -- Roman Joost www: http://www.romanofski.de email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [Gimp-user] So it's a layer border - not a crop frame
Hi Carol, Carol Spears wrote: does anyone know if photoshop has a tooltip explaining the reason they need the same size layer everywhere? Actually, photoshop just keeps layers the size they need to be to hold their contents. If you draw over the edge of a layer, it will grow to accommodate what you draw. I'm not sure, however, if it shrinks the layer when you erase things. There is even a bug open against the GIMP for this functionality, which would be quite nice. It would certainly lower the learning curve for beginners. Why is nothing happenning when I draw? must be one of the most common questions from a beginner who just happened to create a new layer. one thing that i do not understand is the need for floating layers. i dont think that this term is being used properly here. is there any reason that there needs to be the extra step to make pasting directly to an existing layer easier? I don't think so. I believe there is (or was) a bug about that too. IMHO, when you paste, you should paste above the active layer, into a new layer, and be done with it. People can then move the layer merge down if they really want to, but as you say, once people discover layers they rarely anchor to the original layer directly. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary, Lyon, France E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CV: http://dneary.free.fr/CV/ ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] So it's a layer border - not a crop frame
one thing that i do not understand is the need for floating layers. i dont think that this term is being used properly here. is there any reason that there needs to be the extra step to make pasting directly to an existing layer easier? I don't think so. I believe there is (or was) a bug about that too. IMHO, when you paste, you should paste above the active layer, into a new layer, and be done with it. People can then move the layer merge down if they really want to, but as you say, once people discover layers they rarely anchor to the original layer directly. Hi, I'm new here and probably won't post often, but I think I have an answer to the origin of the floating layers. I was recently looking though the GIMP 1.3 manual. And if I remember correctly, it said something like this. There was a time in GIMP or some software that inspired GIMP where there were not layers. Thus for pasting, floating layers were born to crop and move, I believe, the pasted portion to the appropriate dimensions before anchoring. Hope this was what you were looking for! -John ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] Re: So it's a layer border - not a crop frame
* Carol Spears [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-08-08 07:23]: and what does this get you? you only need to do this if you need the extra space on the layer. Unfortunately I discovered the float layer option _before_ I discovered the move tool, so I was trying to float everything that I needed to move. Combined with not knowing about the layer boundary, it was a disaster. Now that I've come upon the move command, I actually prefer to have conservative layer borders and use the move tool. I have abandoned the float tool, but that's not to say that I won't find a use for it sometime. i suggest that you want to use Photoshop; a not as complex graphics app that has been built for people who cannot understand (or hope to learn to understand) different sizes of layers. Yes, photoshop from what I understand is much better for users first encountering this type of tool, because it requires very little understanding. They can accomplish layer manipulation w/out needing to study some of the esoteric details. Gimp obviously requires people to grasp this foreign concept. This does not mean they cannot understand, as you put it, but that they will not gain an adequate understanding of this from the gui interface. Until the GUI accommodates, this understanding is acquired via explanation. nothing that a little experience would fix. the gimp is not photoshop so it is a mistake to approach using it as if it is. As far as I'm concerned, Gimp is Photoshop, simply because I'm not doing anything complex enough to go beyond the basic functionality that's offered in both packages. Furthermore, I would hope to see Gimp get to a point where it can replace Photoshop. As it is now, it seems Photoshop is a superset of Gimp. one thing that i do not understand is the need for floating layers. i dont think that this term is being used properly here. is there any reason that there needs to be the extra step to make pasting directly to an existing layer easier? it is so rare that i paste anything to an existing layer. it makes more sense to me to make the extra step for those rare occasions that you do paste right to an existing layer. I can see how floating a layer could be useful in some rare instances, but now that I've switched to moving layers as opposed to objects on layers, I could also live without the floating capability. If a majority of users agree that the floating capability is not very useful, maybe a good approach would be to remove it from the standard builds, and require users to proactively compile that option in if they want it. ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] Moving objects strictly on the X or Y axis
How do I restrict movement to be either horizontal or vertical? I tried holding shift, control, and alt, and no luck. ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] So it's a layer border - not a crop frame
On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 09:06:15PM -0500, John Dorfman wrote: I'm new here and probably won't post often, but I think I have an answer to the origin of the floating layers. I was recently looking though the GIMP 1.3 manual. And if I remember correctly, it said something like this. There was a time in GIMP or some software that inspired GIMP where there were not layers. Thus for pasting, floating layers were born to crop and move, I believe, the pasted portion to the appropriate dimensions before anchoring. Hope this was what you were looking for! this is exactly what we needed. it is a historical thing, not a useful one -- this floating layer business. i am going to forward this to the developer list with the suggestion that we drop the whole thing. thanks for the research. carol ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: So it's a layer border - not a crop frame
On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 09:01:20PM -0600, Justin Gombos wrote: * Carol Spears [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-08-08 07:23]: Unfortunately I discovered the float layer option _before_ I discovered the move tool, so I was trying to float everything that I needed to move. Combined with not knowing about the layer boundary, it was a disaster. yeah, sorry it is there at all. Now that I've come upon the move command, I actually prefer to have conservative layer borders and use the move tool. I have abandoned the float tool, but that's not to say that I won't find a use for it sometime. unless you have disc space issues, saving an xcf with all of your layers in tact is a good thing, especially when going back to edit and such. i suggest that you want to use Photoshop; a not as complex graphics app that has been built for people who cannot understand (or hope to learn to understand) different sizes of layers. Yes, photoshop from what I understand is much better for users first encountering this type of tool, because it requires very little understanding. They can accomplish layer manipulation w/out needing to study some of the esoteric details. Gimp obviously requires people to grasp this foreign concept. This does not mean they cannot understand, as you put it, but that they will not gain an adequate understanding of this from the gui interface. Until the GUI accommodates, this understanding is acquired via explanation. the gimp is more like real life i think. the layers would be like a collage going together. if you start with gimp, it is just as difficult to go to photoshop to do things as it is for you right now to go the other way. at least it is/was for me. nothing that a little experience would fix. the gimp is not photoshop so it is a mistake to approach using it as if it is. As far as I'm concerned, Gimp is Photoshop, simply because I'm not doing anything complex enough to go beyond the basic functionality that's offered in both packages. Furthermore, I would hope to see Gimp get to a point where it can replace Photoshop. As it is now, it seems Photoshop is a superset of Gimp. well we get told both all the time. just like photoshop, not as good as photoshop. photoshop does this and that better. crap. gimp isnt photoshop. i know gimp runs on much smaller and older computers than photoshop and they both render graphic images. carol ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
